Help from the community RTX 3080 Fraud

[Exidor]

2 minutes ago, LogicalDrm said:

No. Do you have proof that they have actually sold AND delivered equal product to someone else? Thats the proof I'm talking about. Any order confirmation and receipt would be the contract you are acting about. But that would just make company liable to pay you the original price back. Any more would depend on whether this contract has details about time of delivery as set date. If they have even one word about time of delivery being estimate, they can easily use that as reasoning and then provide their evidence from importers about shortage and manufacturing issues.

 

So you did buy the card as representative of business and getting it on time would have had impact of you conducting your business? That does make difference since at that point getting stuff is tied to your own business ventures. Any laws and how things work there I cannot comment as those kinds of contracts are different and usually more strict in terms of delivery and such.

 

Where in my posts you take that? You seem to have strong opinion, and now try to twist my words against me? Not cool, bro.

 

This is true. But the thing is that unless they have agreed on some certain date of delivery, they haven't broken any law or contract. Not in our law system at least (which I did just re-read to confirm). Our system of law doesn't know the case where customer would be too stubborn to not take their money out of failed transaction, but keep on demanding the product. Only thing I found was that if seller can provide evidence/reason for late delivery, the return period extends from 14-30 days to 12 months. So if you were here, 9 more months to wait.

 

 

My personal opinion, take your money out and don't lose big on courts. I don't see this going your way, mainly because you have options and you aren't taking them.

Look it is getting out of hand in this topic.

 

Just to clarify I did not buy this as a business. But I use it for business.

 

 

If you want to continue this lets move to private messages or hey even voice.

 

 

 

I seriously think you misunderstand the situation and are actively going out of the way to protect speculative market behavior.

There was a market failure. Companies now expect the consumer to pay for it. They as a business took a risk.

To me it seems you are going out of your way to prove that that should be tolerated if not rewarded.

If I am wrong I am sorry. But it sounds like that to me. 

[LogicalDrm]

14 minutes ago, Exidor said:

Look it is getting out of hand in this topic.

 

Just to clarify I did not buy this as a business. But I use it for business.

 

 

If you want to continue this lets move to private messages or hey even voice.

 

 

 

I seriously think you misunderstand the situation and are actively going out of the way to protect speculative market behavior.

There was a market failure. Companies now expect the consumer to pay for it. They as a business took a risk.

To me it seems you are going out of your way to prove that that should be tolerated if not rewarded.

If I am wrong I am sorry. But it sounds like that to me. 

I think we are well in topic. You are claiming a company has fraud you. Thats still what topic title says. I'm arguing against using those terms, and pointing out holes in that. Also still waiting for links to legislation you are basing your accusations on. If you don't want to continue this discussion, which is flaming on certain company, in public, then I have no interest to do it in private either.

 

Overall practice of companies is whole another topic, and something which I would say isn't a topic we should be discussing on the forums overall. So much of that depends on local legislations.

[Exidor]

15 minutes ago, LogicalDrm said:

I think we are well in topic. You are claiming a company has fraud you. Thats still what topic title says. I'm arguing against using those terms, and pointing out holes in that. Also still waiting for links to legislation you are basing your accusations on. If you don't want to continue this discussion, which is flaming on certain company, in public, then I have no interest to do it in private either.

 

Overall practice of companies is whole another topic, and something which I would say isn't a topic we should be discussing on the forums overall. So much of that depends on local legislations.

Look.

 

Fair.

I think this is fraud.

And you fail to address the most basic arguments.

 

They took the money promised something they did not deliver. How is that not false pretenses?

The law clearly states that I own the item after I pay for it. Point me to somewhere that states differently? Has nothing to do with delivery it is just in somebody elses custody. Custody does not include the ability to resell it.

They might have sold cards other people bought to somebody else everything points towards that and made a profit.

They are openly advertising and selling cards at a higher markup so they are able to source them. This leads me to believe they just choose not to pay the premium and honor previous sales contracts.

The card is more expensive right now that is the market price. Why should anybody accept them buying it back/accept lower compensation at a lower price? Or even if they did not get a shipment and resell it. They still made a profit of those transactions.

Comparable products have a very much higher price. A person buys a product for functionality you pay for specifications so the current value is the value set by the market.

 

I honestly get non of your arguments.

The subject of the contract was an item not a sum of money. Namely an Asus strix OC GTX 3080. Not the 981 euros. This is the fundamental we disagree on. They are dealing in cards that they technically do not own anymore. They are refusing to deliver market value of the product set by a free market.

[-iSynthesis]

1 hour ago, LogicalDrm said:

So in German law system its "guilty until proven innocent"? Many other systems work opposite ways where you must prove wrongful action and until then its just accusations.

In general you are right. However in Germany (f.e. with warranty claims etc.) oftentimes the proof of the damage is on the companies, this is implemented to protect consumers. As an example, the seller has to prove that the product was damaged by the consumer for the first 6 months if he does not accept a warranty claim, not the other way around.

 

To clear some things up, you are not official owner of an item until you have paid for it AND received it (§929 BGB). You are however owed that you actually get the item.

I guess the law that would apply if you do not get an item is the same that would apply with a warranty claim. This states that the seller can either provide a refund or demand that he tries to repair the item up to two times. 

They can't repair something they haven't sent it to you in the first place.

 

This refund would span the amount of money you paid, NOT current market price.

The law for this is §249 BGB, which states that they have to provide you the money that you would have if you would not have purchased the item in the first place. This leaves possible room for interest, but this would be pointless to try and get from them as it would be minimal.

 

Ideal steps to take:

1) It is always important to give them a set span of time (a realistic one) to send you the item you are owed. (F.e. 2 weeks, this step takes you out of any problems you might encounter)

If they do not fulfill this or 2) Clearly state that they are not interested in sending you the item you are obligated to the refund under the conditions I stated earlier.

 

 

I cannot see a direct crime they have committed (only possibly fraudulent conversion or something along the lines, called "Unterschlagung" in German, though I doubt this would be acknowledged in court).  A court case would probably not lead to any realistic gain for you more than a simple refund. If they don't provide that, sure, go ahead.

I know you're pissed right now but you'll be even more pissed if you spend money and a lot of time building a court case to, at most, get an interest of maybe 1-2% on your money.

My advice: Get your refund asap, if not go to court. If you get it, get out of there and leave a bad review.

[Exidor]

11 minutes ago, -iSynthesis said:

In general you are right. However in Germany (f.e. with warranty claims etc.) oftentimes the proof of the damage is on the companies, this is implemented to protect consumers. As an example, the seller has to prove that the product was damaged by the consumer for the first 6 months if he does not accept a warranty claim, not the other way around.

 

To clear some things up, you are not official owner of an item until you have paid for it AND received it (§929 BGB). You are however owed that you actually get the item.

I guess the law that would apply if you do not get an item is the same that would apply with a warranty claim. This states that the seller can either provide a refund or demand that he tries to repair the item up to two times. 

They can't repair something they haven't sent it to you in the first place.

 

This refund would span the amount of money you paid, NOT current market price.

The law for this is §249 BGB, which states that they have to provide you the money that you would have if you would not have purchased the item in the first place. This leaves possible room for interest, but this would be pointless to try and get from them as it would be minimal.

 

Ideal steps to take:

1) It is always important to give them a set span of time (a realistic one) to send you the item you are owed. (F.e. 2 weeks, this step takes you out of any problems you might encounter)

If they do not fulfill this or 2) Clearly state that they are not interested in sending you the item you are obligated to the refund under the conditions I stated earlier.

 

 

I cannot see a direct crime they have committed (only possibly fraudulent conversion or something along the lines, called "Unterschlagung" in German, though I doubt this would be acknowledged in court).  A court case would probably not lead to any realistic gain for you more than a simple refund. If they don't provide that, sure, go ahead.

I know you're pissed right now but you'll be even more pissed if you spend money and a lot of time building a court case to, at most, get an interest of maybe 1-2% on your money.

My advice: Get your refund asap, if not go to court. If you get it, get out of there and leave a bad review.

Thank you for the input.

 

I did give them a time span in which to respond.

I will first hear what lawyers think some people I know and worked with.

 

For now they tend to agree that this is fraud.

They are unsure however as you said how that would go in court.

As many of the arguments can go either way.

 

Also as I use this PC for business purposes I have damages claim that can go pretty high.

 

 

The thing is them selling the cards at a higher price and not honoring previous sales agreements can basically be seen as admitting systematic fraud.

This is probably the main reason I am writing here. And will post in other places.

Because I suspect there are hundreds probably a couple thousand people affected.

 

I am mostly pissed that they took in several million euros for free used them for what ever business activities they felt like made a profit and then told hundreds of people to just fuck off.....

We are talking 1%-2% or so of their stated yearly turnover here. For a web store this is a considerable amount of money considering the industries average profit margin.

[IntMD]

https://www.computeruniverse.net/en/page/allgemeine-geschaeftsbedingungen

 

Section 2 really covers this.

 

Quote

2. Offer and Conclusion of the Contract

Our range of articles is not binding. The order of a customer is an offer to enter into a purchase contract. The following confirmation of the receipt of the order and any following status reports are no acceptance of the offer. The purchase contract is accomplished with delivery of the goods and confirmation of dispatch.

An order is an offer to enter into a purchase contract. Only when goods are dispatched & delivered is that contract completed and activated. So unless the German law specifies (and it may well do) that paying immediately counts a purchase contract as binding instead of still just an offer, it should revert to the above terms. I don't mean here, that you just thought you were buying a specific product either. From what you have said, you essentially entered in to a purchase contract offer, by paying them funds to go into a queue as they didn't actually have stock at the time you made your order (which they also seem to have mentioned when you ordered). From the way I read it, they have basically closed out that offer and should refund you the amount you have paid as there was no final binding purchase contract made, as the item was not delivered.

 

They should still be the ones refunding you, which I imagine is exactly what they will do.

[Exidor]

3 minutes ago, IntMD said:

https://www.computeruniverse.net/en/page/allgemeine-geschaeftsbedingungen

 

Section 2 really covers this.

 

An order is an offer to enter into a purchase contract. Only when goods are dispatched & delivered is that contract completed and activated. So unless the German law specifies (and it may well do) that paying immediately counts a purchase contract as binding instead of still just an offer, it should revert to the above terms. I don't mean here, that you just thought you were buying a specific product either. From what you have said, you essentially entered in to a purchase contract offer, by paying them funds to go into a queue as they didn't actually have stock at the time you made your order (which they also seem to have mentioned when you ordered). From the way I read it, they have basically closed out that offer and should refund you the amount you have paid as there was no final binding purchase contract made, as the item was not delivered.

 

They should still be the ones refunding you, which I imagine is exactly what they will do.

No they were selling as delivering in a week or two.

Then it changed to unknown date. My first invoice states delivery 10-14 business days......

 

Then they started updating with status updates and emails.

Until cancelation.

 

I did not preorder or anything like that.

[IntMD]

1 minute ago, Exidor said:

No they well selling as delivering in a week or two.

Then it changed to unknown date.

You said, and I quote here...

 

Quote

 The card was marked as shipping has issues thats a rough translation from German. They officially put it as "Availability is subject to significant fluctuations"

 

So, which was it?

[Exidor]

1 minute ago, IntMD said:

You said, and I quote here...

 

 

So, which was it?

Edited post above.

 

 

When I ordered they clearly stated in writing on the invoice delivery in 10-14 work days.

Then next week it changed to unknown date.

[-iSynthesis]

7 minutes ago, IntMD said:

https://www.computeruniverse.net/en/page/allgemeine-geschaeftsbedingungen

 

Section 2 really covers this.

 

An order is an offer to enter into a purchase contract. Only when goods are dispatched & delivered is that contract completed and activated. So unless the German law specifies (and it may well do) that paying immediately counts a purchase contract as binding instead of still just an offer, it should revert to the above terms. I don't mean here, that you just thought you were buying a specific product either. From what you have said, you essentially entered in to a purchase contract offer, by paying them funds to go into a queue as they didn't actually have stock at the time you made your order (which they also seem to have mentioned when you ordered). From the way I read it, they have basically closed out that offer and should refund you the amount you have paid as there was no final binding purchase contract made, as the item was not delivered.

 

They should still be the ones refunding you, which I imagine is exactly what they will do.

Legal gray-zone. If you place an order on a specific offer the order itself is usually seen as the acceptance of the seller. It's not sure wether their AGBs can go around that.

If they sent him a confirmation of order, which most online shops do, the purchase contract was made, no question. A confirmation that they have received the order is not enough.

[IntMD]

1 minute ago, Exidor said:

Edited post above.

 

 

When I ordered they clearly stated in writing on the invoice delivery in 10-14 work days.

Then next week it changed to unknown date.

Was it an invoice, or just a confirmation of order? Do you have a copy of the invoice that you can post (make sure to blank out order numbers and addresses and any other identifiable personal stuff on it.

[Exidor]

Just now, -iSynthesis said:

Legal gray-zone. If you place an order on a specific offer the order itself is usually seen as the acceptance of the seller. It's not sure wether their AGBs can go around that.

If they sent him a confirmation of order, which most online shops do, the purchase contract was made, no question. A confirmation that they have received the order is not enough.

As I said I have an invoice from the company as a PDF that states delivery and states that the invoice was payed.

[-iSynthesis]

55 minutes ago, Exidor said:

As I said I have an invoice from the company as a PDF that states delivery and states that the invoice was payed.

In that case it's pretty clear^^ Sorry, I get pretty lost in the mass of posts in this thread.

[Exidor]

They basically forcefully refunded me......

 

The email exchange is still ongoing.

I will have a call with my friend Monday. And will consult him what can be done. And if it is worth doing it.

 

Literally the money came in as the email chain is still ongoing. Usually those take a long time to process seems somebody wants to be rid of me as soon as possible.....

 

I am debating if I should dispute the transaction with the bank.

[LogicalDrm]

2 hours ago, Exidor said:

 think this is fraud.

And you fail to address the most basic arguments.

Ok. Definition of fraud is that its deceiving on purpose and with gain. As I see it, the company didn't know at the time you made purchase that they couldn't be able to deliver the item stated in purchase. Possible reasons being that the stock they got was too small, or that they didn't ever receive that particular item. So they didn't know that they were selling products they didn't have in their possession. As I see it, thats not fraud.

 

2 hours ago, Exidor said:

They took the money promised something they did not deliver. How is that not false pretenses?

Because they didn't have knowledge at the time deal was made that they were being scammed on importer/Nvidia side. If anyone has reasons for lawsuit, its the companies now suffering from angry customers flooding their CS, banks with charge backs and people like you with lawyers on leash. They could sue Nvidia for losses caused by Nvidia not fulfilling their part of the deal.

 

2 hours ago, Exidor said:

They might have sold cards other people bought to somebody else everything points towards that and made a profit.

They are openly advertising and selling cards at a higher markup so they are able to source them. This leads me to believe they just choose not to pay the premium and honor previous sales contracts.

You have not provided proof of any of this in this thread. So, because this is internet, I don't believe you.

 

2 hours ago, Exidor said:

I honestly get non of your arguments.

The subject of the contract was an item not a sum of money. Namely an Asus strix OC GTX 3080. Not the 981 euros. This is the fundamental we disagree on. They are dealing in cards that they technically do not own anymore. They are refusing to deliver market value of the product set by a free market.

Its more like your basic understanding on how trading works is causing issues. You assume that once price has been paid in full, contract is fulfilled and failure to deliver is voiding it. Thats not the case. Only when delivery is done the contract is fulfilled. Until that point its open matter, and can in certain circumstances be cancelled by either party.

 

33 minutes ago, Exidor said:

I am debating if I should dispute the transaction with the bank.

The bank: "You want to... not get your money back? Did I just hear that right? You want to send the money back to company so you can sue them for not delivering goods?"

[FmPhenom]

I'm gonna type what everyone wants to, but will not.

 

STFU and call your credit card company and get your money back. This place is not going to help you. Your "lawyer" sounds like a ambulance chaser if he/she is giving you a glimmer of hope that this is a fraud case. 

[Moonzy]

4 hours ago, Exidor said:

I work in IT and it is a huge inconvenience to have an unfinished build and not being able to migrate to the new CPU.

Yes the GPU will not really improve the performance of the work I do but the new build will, completing that depends on the GPU.

As with a building or any item if I lack a component that hinders its functionality and have to pay for a replacement. Those are damages.

this is a bit of a stretch, dont you think??

 

4 hours ago, Exidor said:

So what you are saying we should encourage companies to speculate take a risk with other peoples money. Under false pretenses of a sales contract that they by selling at a higher markup and delivering and not delivering to people they sold to at a lower markup proof or at least point to not being interested in honoring.

So the consumers should just fund this speculation?

if you can prove they are doing it on purpose, sure

i doubt it tho, the global shortage is worse than anyone's imagination at this point.

 

4 hours ago, Exidor said:

But the seller first has to prove that he did all he could to procure that item.

just... look at the global shortages

 

now you said they sold the product they were supposed to deliver to you (different model doesnt count, even version doesnt count if they wanna be sneaky about it)

so you have to prove it

[FmPhenom]

Mods can you please close this thread. 

 

To protect his legal interests. 

 

I'm pretty sure his/her/they (it is 2021 after all) "lawyer" has advised him against airing out his legal strategy. Might hinder his court case.

 

 

[Sport Driver]

Well that was interesting topic indeed. I just noticed the other day that (almost) all 3080s and 3060ti's were removed from store. Was wandering what is up with that. I will assume people were so desperate and were buying them even at those outlandish prices meanwhile computeruniverse didn't even have stock allocated.  Don't know for sure though. 

 

But yeah, I wouldn't call that fraud. But it is a shoddy practice to say the least. But honestly, going with this to court will get you nowhere. If you didn't have their promise at the time of purchase ("expected shipping in 7-14 days" isn't one) how quick you would get it you can't do much. And let's be honest, if you really needed it for work as you are saying it you would have bought that EVGA card for 500€ more. If it is urgent for business this is nothing.  

 

Only card that seems to be in OK stock is 3070, for inflated price though unfortunately. 

[Biomecanoid]

2 hours ago, Exidor said:

They basically forcefully refunded me......

The would anyways

2 hours ago, Exidor said:

 

The email exchange is still ongoing.

I will have a call with my friend Monday. And will consult him what can be done. And if it is worth doing it.

If its really your friend he will tell you its not worth it. If its just another lawyer he will proceed with the case to "eat up" your money.

 

2 hours ago, Exidor said:

 

Literally the money came in as the email chain is still ongoing. Usually those take a long time to process seems somebody wants to be rid of me as soon as possible.....

Refunds just take 2-3 days to show in your bank account. It is normal its not like they expeditated the process somehow because they are afraid of you. You do act like its your 1st time buying stuff online.

2 hours ago, Exidor said:

 

I am debating if I should dispute the transaction with the bank.

Oh now you don't want your own money bank. that's another level of s_ _ _ _d 

[Biomecanoid]

1 hour ago, FmPhenom said:

Mods can you please close this thread. 

 

To protect his legal interests. 

 

I'm pretty sure his/her/they (it is 2021 after all) "lawyer" has advised him against airing out his legal strategy. Might hinder his court case.

 

 

He is supposed to be lawyer himself and doesn't seem to understand exactly that ...

[Middcore]

The idea of calling the bank and refusing to take your money back is where I lost any ounce of sympathy I had left. The term "First World Problems" doesn't even begin to cover how petty this is. Honestly the way people are acting about these shortages, about luxury goods, toys, especially people who already have very capable PC's and just want to have the latest and greatest, makes me disgusted with the entire hobby. 

[Stockholmes]

Yeah the OP is making a mountain out of a molehill. There are severe shortages of GPU's, as the OP must know. The company he bought the card from isn't frauding him, they just don't have the cards themselves. It seems like the OP is completely sure in his own head that the company he bought from actually *does have* stock of the card he bought and is selling them at a mark-up, leaving him and others who paid the original lesser price without cards. I don't think that's actually happening, wouldn't that actually be illegal? I doubt the company wants to risk doing that. But this is how I think the OP is thinking.

 

OP, you got your money back, so everything should be settled then. Taking this kind of thing to court, as others have said, is a fools errand. Sucks that you didn't get your card for cheap, but such is life. The lyrics "know when to hold em, know when to fold em" comes to mind here.

[Exidor]

38 minutes ago, Stockholmes said:

Yeah the OP is making a mountain out of a molehill. There are severe shortages of GPU's, as the OP must know. The company he bought the card from isn't frauding him, they just don't have the cards themselves. It seems like the OP is completely sure in his own head that the company he bought from actually *does have* stock of the card he bought and is selling them at a mark-up, leaving him and others who paid the original lesser price without cards. I don't think that's actually happening, wouldn't that actually be illegal? I doubt the company wants to risk doing that. But this is how I think the OP is thinking.

 

OP, you got your money back, so everything should be settled then. Taking this kind of thing to court, as others have said, is a fools errand. Sucks that you didn't get your card for cheap, but such is life. The lyrics "know when to hold em, know when to fold em" comes to mind here.EVGA GeForce RTX3080 FTW3 Ultra GAMING 10 GB OC Enthusiast Grafikkarte - Grafikkarten PCI Express - computeruniverse _ computeruniverse.pdf

That is exactly what they are doing. If you google the URL and use the google cash you will see that today it was available for sale and google cash saved it.

https://www.computeruniverse.net/de/evga-geforce-rtx3080-ftw3-ultra-gaming-10-gb-oc-enthusiast-grafikkarte

 

Sure they have not directly stated in an email that they have not sold any...... Or admitted to selling any but. I saw such links pop up as drops over the week. When I randomly went to the website. 

 

Sure a lot of it is in the legal grey zone.... And yes I am overreacting probably.

But I am getting a bit sick of every legal grey zone automatically being exploited against me.

[Exidor]

File

EVGA GeForce RTX3080 FTW3 Ultra GAMING 10 GB OC Enthusiast Grafikkarte - Grafikkarten PCI Express - computeruniverse _ computeruniverse.pdf